Fear Not For Man? Armed conflict and social capital in Mali

Abstract

This paper studies the effects of armed conflict on social capital in Mali, where a violent conflict has been raging since 2012. We examine the conflict's impacts on associational membership using event location data and unique survey data on governance, peace and security (GPS-SHaSA). We show that, in conflict-exposed areas, adult involvement in associations increases from 7 to 14 percentage points. Instrumental variable and difference-indifferences strategies complementary mitigate reverse causation and omitted variable biases as estimated results remain very consistent. Robust estimations constrained to non-migrants samples also rule out selection into migration. Yet this result, consistent with the argument that armed conflict cultivates social engagement, is not a positive outcome in the case of Mali. The increase is observed solely for family and political associations, which are comparatively inward-looking and act as interest groups. We interpret this finding as a form of withdrawal behind group or community boundaries, an interpretation supported by further analysis of interpersonal trust. This sort of withdrawal may exacerbate ethnic divisions and deepen the conflict.

Potential Impact of Climate Change and Armed Conflict on Inequality in Sub‐Saharan Africa

“…Table 2 presents the results of the static model. From the static models' results, the coefficient of the major variables of interest -the climate change and armed conflict -appears consistent with theoretical projections and the findings of previous studies such as Breckner and Sunde (2019), Calvo et al (2020), Lessmann and Steinkraus (2019), Grima andSingh (2019), andIde et al (2020). The results show that the coefficients of the climate change variable, armed conflict and the indirect impact of climate are positive and significant across the four functional static models.…”

Fear of the state in governance surveys? Empirical evidence from African countries

“…In 2012, they were incorporated into a vast programme launched by the African Union Commission in a move to develop regular institutionalised statistics on governance, peace and security at national and sub-national level. For example, the GPS-SHaSA modules are already an integral part of the annual Malian household survey, EMOP, with GPS-SHaSA data now available from 2014 onwards for precise dynamic analyses and studies (Razafindrakoto et al, 2015;Calvo et al, 2019). Fifteen countries have now grafted the GPS-SHaSA modules onto their Labour Force Surveys (LFSs).…”

Motives behind community participation: Evidence from natural and artefactual field experiments in Sri Lanka

“…Third, network formation is also important for establishing risk‐sharing arrangements (Angelucci et al, 2009; Bramoullié & Kranton, 2007; Calvo et al, 2020; Carter & Castillo, 2005; Fafchamps & Gubert, 2007; Fafchamps & Lund, 2003; Murgai et al, 2002; Rosenzweig & Stark, 1989). This is achieved by developing close social relationships through which individuals create social collateral (Karlan et al, 2009; Paal & Wiseman, 2010; Shoji, 2020) and, thus, exchange idiosyncratic shocks (Townsend, 1994).…”

“…Policymakers and development practitioners often encourage social capital accumulation among rural households (Gugerty & Kremer, 2000); this is because social capital accumulation is essential to economic development (Durlauf & Fafchamps, 2005; Grootaert & van Bastelaer, 2002; Ishise & Sawada, 2009; Knack & Keefer, 1997; Narayan & Pritchett, 1999; Putnam, Leonardi, & Nanetti, 1993). While Durlauf and Fafchamps (2005) describe how social capital arises from informal forms of organizations based on social networks and associations, empirical quantification of the social capital formation process is still scarce (Calvo, Lavallée, Razafindrakoto, & Roubaud, 2020; Durlauf, 2002; Durlauf & Fafchamps, 2005; Miguel, Gertler, & Levine, 2006). Our findings fill the gap in the literature on social capital by showing that community participation patterns are determined by the costs and benefits of forming risk‐sharing networks.…”